ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2026
Development and pilot testing of a web-based decision aid for fertility-preservation decisions among women with cancer in South Korea.
Article in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Fertility preservation is an important concern for women of reproductive age with cancer. Many receive insufficient counseling and may experience decisional conflict and psychological distress. This study aimed to develop and pilot test SHARE, a web-based decision aid supporting fertility-preservation decisions among women of reproductive age with cancer in South Korea, using a process informed by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). Methods: This development and pilot-testing study included scoping, steering-group formation, a needs assessment with 16 women who had completed cancer treatment and 7 health care professionals, evidence synthesis, iterative prototyping, think-aloud alpha testing ( Results: SHARE comprises seven interactive modules covering fertility risks, fertility-preservation options, values clarification, and preparation for clinical discussions. Alpha testing identified navigation, terminology, personalization, and visual-design issues. In beta testing, mean module information-presentation ratings ranged from 2.73 to 3.40 on a 4-point scale; 11 of 15 participants (73.3%) reported that SHARE was useful for decision-making, and 12 of 15 (80.0%) perceived the information as balanced. User Experience Questionnaire scores were positive for Perspicuity (1.42), Efficiency (0.98), and Dependability (0.97) and neutral for Attractiveness (0.64), Stimulation (0.33), and Novelty (-0.02). The importance of starting cancer treatment as soon as possible was rated 9.67/10, compared with 6.33/10 for having a child in the future. Conclusions: This small post-treatment pilot provided preliminary evidence of acceptability and stronger pragmatic than hedonic user-experience ratings; it did not establish decisional or clinical effectiveness. Prospective evaluation in newly diagnosed women across cancer types is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.